Opinions on Explorer 16570

[aba123]

Hi guys,

I am considering this Rolex Explorer 16570, but I’m hoping to get some input on the condition.

The watch is from 1991, with a pretty beat up bezel. For my untrained eye the case also looks rough as well. However, I really like the patina of the dial. I’m planning to use it as an everyday watch, and then the bruises might not be as important?

The bracelet is marked 93150.

[Ancestral Star]

I would keep looking. Perhaps for one where the hands' luminescence matches the dial better. The 16570 is not the hardest reference to find, even examples from the early 1990s.

[aba123]

Originally Posted by Ancestral Star

I would keep looking. Perhaps for one where the hands' luminescence matches the dial better. The 16570 is not the hardest reference to find, even examples from the early 1990s.

Thanks. To learn: What do you think is the biggest negative?

[Richard Carver]

Nice looking dial. if patina is what you want that one is great. The matching hand thing is kind of a noobie trap.The dials and hands came from different factories with different mixtures and rarely match as they age. When you see a 50 year old matchy matchy it's most likely been done so by a dealer; Those hands may be replacements but never let a consumable kill a deal.

I wouldn't be surprised if your watch isn't a 91 X serial as they seem to get that delicious patina faster than my 91 N serial (boo hoo). That bezel looks fine for a daily wear.The hands on my 91 are turning faster than the dial!

[aba123]

Thanks, Richard! I’ll get the serial number and check if it is X or N.

[danh1023]

Richard is on point. Here's my N-serial, and the patina of the tritium is not quite to the level of the one you are looking at. Also, the hands don't have the same patina as the hour markers on mine.

As far as the case and bezel condition, I wouldn't worry too much. You can always have it addressed at the next service if you want to clean it up. Mine is fairly nicked and faded. I asked my watchmaker not to work on the case the last time it was in for a service. I like seeing the nicks and scratches it accumulates over time. This one was my weekender, but has now become my almost daily watch since quarantine. I wear this watch to work in the yard, on the cars, and around the house so it takes a beating, but that's why I wear Rolex. If you do pick this one up, wear it in good health!

[swish77]

Fair points on the patina difference between dial and hands. They can age differently. However, they also CAN age the same naturally and take on a uniform appearance, and that's what I would look for in a 16570, or on any vintage or neo-vintage Rolex. There's a reason watches with matching tritium patina command a premium.

I would suspect the hands on the OP's example have been replaced at some point, but hard to know for sure. A UV photo might give some clues. Love the look of the watch otherwise, scratches and all.

[zapokee]

Originally Posted by swish77

However, they also CAN age the same naturally and take on a uniform appearance, and that's what I would look for in a 16570, or on any vintage or neo-vintage Rolex.

This. Mr. Carver makes a fair point, but the fact is that it's much easier to sell on an example where everything matches up, and people will pay more for it.

#carverforpresident

[Thuilln]

If I’m correct, the bracelet is from a Submariner. I have no idea if they were ever put on Explorers from factory.

[zapokee]

Originally Posted by Thuilln

If I’m correct, the bracelet is from a Submariner. I have no idea if they were ever put on Explorers from factory.

Thought it should have a GMT-type bracelet, but this one from Jacek also has the Sub type:

https://tropicalwatch.com/watches/md9n

Some examples on HQ Milton have Sub bracelets and some have GMT bracelets, so I guess Rolex gave customers the choice.

We're all learning.

[Sherbie]

This might help.

I too have seen sub bracelets on these, but not often


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[nigelk]

Originally Posted by Richard Carver

Nice looking dial. if patina is what you want that one is great. The matching hand thing is kind of a noobie trap.The dials and hands came from different factories with different mixtures and rarely match as they age. When you see a 50 year old matchy matchy it's most likely been done so by a dealer; Those hands may be replacements but never let a consumable kill a deal.

I wouldn't be surprised if your watch isn't a 91 X serial as they seem to get that delicious patina faster than my 91 N serial (boo hoo). That bezel looks fine for a daily wear.The hands on my 91 are turning faster than the dial!

I learnt something here. How about luminova/superluminova dial and hands? I sometimes see lume strength on these that are different. Is that normal or a red flag?

[Dan S]

While hands and dial can age differently, the dramatic difference in this case makes it a bit hard for me to believe that the hands are original. More importantly, you will have to decide for yourself whether you find the mismatched lume appealing. Honestly, I don't, but that's just one person's subjective opinion about aesthetics. Like you, I really appreciate the way the tritium has aged on the dial, and would prefer to find an example with similar lume on the hands as well.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by Thuilln

If I’m correct, the bracelet is from a Submariner. I have no idea if they were ever put on Explorers from factory.

There was a choice between the two at point of purchase in those days.

[aba123]

So it’s an N-serial. Thank you for your opinions. I will consider and post it here if I decide to purchase it. The bracelet has a lot of stretch and the difference between the hands and dial is pretty dramatic as pointed out. The seller claims that the hands are original.

[faimag]

Very nice dial. Beautiful. Early 1990s examples (not just the 16570, but also subs and gmts) typically show much more patina on the dial than the (original) hands. Have seen it again and again. I wouldn’t worry about it.

By the way, the X serial is a bit tricky. I have seen some go up to 1996 (date of sale on the certificate; with corresponding clasp date code—meaning these are not 1990 watches that haven’t been sold for years). The common perception that X is early 1990 is incorrect.

[AJMarcus]

In my view, the hands have most definitely been replaced. Most do so because they are concerned flaking of the lume on the hands will damage the dial and movement. I would pass on this piece. I prefer the dials and hands to age proportionately. As it’s been pointed out there are so many 16570 pieces out there no need to pay a premium on this one. Oyster bracelet also appears too thick and wrong for this variant. Looks like a Submariner oyster. .

[aba123]

Thank you for your opinions! I decided to pick this one up instead, a T-serial with the correct bracelet without stretch. I like the dial of the other one better, but thought this was a safer choice for my first Rolex!

[Ancestral Star]

Looks fantastic. The 16570 was the first Rolex watch I purchased for myself. A very fine reference, wear it in the best of health.